34961Case T-623/19: Order of the General Court of 30 April 2020 — ArcelorMittal Bremen v Commission (Action for failure to act — Directive 2003/87/EC — Scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading — Decision 2011/278/EU — Transitional rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances — Amendment of Germany’s national allocation table for 2013-2020 — Significant increase in capacity — Action which has become devoid of purpose — No need to adjudicate)cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34962Ordonnance de la Cour (huitième chambre) du 30 avril 2020.#Flightright GmbH contre Eurowings GmbH.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Article 99 du règlement de procédure de la Cour – Transports aériens – Règlement (CE) no 261/2004 – Indemnisation des passagers aériens en cas d’annulation d’un vol – Retard important – Droit à indemnisation – Distance à prendre en considération – Vol comportant une escale – Vol avec correspondances – Prise en compte de la distance totale du vol ou uniquement du segment annulé.#Affaire C-939/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34963Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 April 2020.#Flightright GmbH v Eurowings GmbH.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Düsseldorf.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Air transport — Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 — Compensation for flight passengers in the event of cancellation of a flight — Long delay — Right to compensation — Distance to be taken into account — Flight with a stopover — Connecting flight — Taking into account of the total flight distance or the cancelled leg of the journey only.#Case C-939/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34964Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 30 April 2020.#„Marvik-Pastrogor“ EOOD v Darzhavata, predstavlyavana ot Ministara na fïnansite and „Rodes - 08“ EOOD v Narodno sabranie na Republika Bulgaria and Darzhavata, predstavlyavana ot Ministara na finansite.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Environment – Electricity generated by solar and wind power – Directive 2009/28/EC – Promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources – Article 3(3), first subparagraph, point (a) – Mandatory national overall targets – Articles 16 and 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Freedom to conduct a business – Right to property – General principles of non-discrimination, legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations – Tax on the production of energy from renewable sources – Manifest lack of jurisdiction, in part, of the Court.#Joined Cases C-818/19 and C-878/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34965Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 30 April 2020.#„Marvik-Pastrogor“ EOOD v Darzhavata, predstavlyavana ot Ministara na fïnansite and „Rodes - 08“ EOOD v Narodno sabranie na Republika Bulgaria and Darzhavata, predstavlyavana ot Ministara na finansite.#Requests for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgarie) and Sofiyski rayonen sad.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Environment – Electricity generated by solar and wind power – Directive 2009/28/EC – Promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources – Article 3(3), first subparagraph, point (a) – Mandatory national overall targets – Articles 16 and 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Freedom to conduct a business – Right to property – General principles of non-discrimination, legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations – Tax on the production of energy from renewable sources – Manifest lack of jurisdiction, in part, of the Court.#Joined Cases C-818/19 and C-878/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34966Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 30 April 2020.#Hochmann Marketing GmbH v European Parliament.#Appeal – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request to act addressed to the European Parliament – Decision by the Parliament’s Committee on Petitions – Parliament’s lack of competence to amend the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the General Court of the European Union and manifest inadmissibility of the action at first instance – Appeal manifestly unfounded.#Case C-557/19 P.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34967Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 30 April 2020.#Hochmann Marketing GmbH v European Parliament.#Appeal – Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Request to act addressed to the European Parliament – Decision by the Parliament’s Committee on Petitions – Parliament’s lack of competence to amend the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Manifest lack of jurisdiction of the General Court of the European Union and manifest inadmissibility of the action at first instance – Appeal manifestly unfounded.#Case C-557/19 P.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34968Arrêt de la Cour (dixième chambre) du 30 avril 2020.#EUROVIA Ipari, Kereskedelmi, Szállítmányozási és Idegenforgalmi Kft. contre Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Système commun de taxe sur la valeur ajoutée – Directive 77/388/CEE – Article 10, paragraphe 2, premier et troisième alinéas, article 17, paragraphe 1, et article 18, paragraphe 2, premier alinéa – Directive 2006/112/CE – Article 63, article 64, paragraphe 1, article 66, premier alinéa, sous a) à c), article 167 et article 179, premier alinéa – Prestation de services réalisée avant l’adhésion de la Hongrie à l’Union européenne – Détermination exacte du prix de cette prestation intervenue après l’adhésion – Facture relative à ladite prestation émise, et acquittement de celle-ci effectué, après l’adhésion – Refus du droit à déduction fondé sur cette facture en raison de la prescription – Compétence de la Cour.#Affaire C-258/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34969Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 30 April 2020.#EUROVIA Ipari, Kereskedelmi, Szállítmányozási és Idegenforgalmi Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kúria.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common system of value added tax – Directive 77/388/EEC – First and third subparagraphs of Article 10(2), Article 17(1) and first subparagraph of Article 18(2) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Article 63, Article 64(1), subparagraphs (a) to (c) of the first paragraph of Article 66, Article 167 and the first paragraph of Article 179 – Services supplied before Hungary acceded to the European Union – Exact remuneration for that supply determined after accession – Invoice relating to that supply issued and paid after accession – Refusal on the grounds of limitation of the right to deduct based on that invoice – Jurisdiction of the Court.#Case C-258/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34970Arrêt de la Cour (dixième chambre) du 30 avril 2020.#UO contre Készenléti Rendőrség.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Politique sociale – Protection de la sécurité et de la santé des travailleurs – Directive 2003/88/CE – Champ d’application – Dérogation – Article 1er, paragraphe 3 – Directive 89/391/CEE – Article 2, paragraphe 2 – Activités des forces d’intervention de la police.#Affaire C-211/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34971Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 30 April 2020.#UO v Készenléti Rendőrség.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Miskolci Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Protection of the safety and health of workers — Directive 2003/88/EC — Scope — Derogation — Article 1(3) — Directive 89/391/EEC — Article 2(2) — Activities of rapid intervention police officers.#Case C-211/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34972Arrêt de la Cour (huitième chambre) du 30 avril 2020.#OI contre Air Nostrum Líneas Aéreas del Mediterráneo SA.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Transports aériens – Règlement (CE) no 261/2004 – Indemnisation des passagers aériens en cas de refus d’embarquement – Refus d’embarquement – Annulation – Vol avec correspondance – Modification de la réservation d’un des vols composant le transport aérien contre la volonté du passager – Arrivée du passager sans retard à sa destination finale.#Affaire C-191/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34973Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 April 2020.#OI v Air Nostrum Líneas Aéreas del Mediterráneo SA.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Frankfurt am Main.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Air transport — Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 — Compensation for air passengers in the event of denied boarding — Denied boarding — Cancellation — Connecting flights — Change of the reservation in respect of one of the flights comprising the journey by air against the passenger’s will — Arrival of the passenger without delay at his or her final destination.#Case C-191/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34974Arrêt de la Cour (septième chambre) du 30 avril 2020.#Hecta Viticol SRL contre Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală – Direcţia Generală de Soluţionare a Contestaţiilor e.a.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Directives 92/83/CEE et 92/84/CEE – Taux d’accises sur le vin et les boissons fermentées non mousseuses, autres que le vin ou la bière – Taux d’accises différenciés – Principes de sécurité juridique et de protection de la confiance légitime.#Affaire C-184/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34975Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 30 April 2020.#Hecta Viticol SRL v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală (ANAF) – Direcţia Generală de Soluţionare a Contestaţiilor and Others.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Bucureşti.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directives 92/83/EEC and 92/84/EEC – Rates of excise duty on wine and still fermented beverages other than wine and beer – Differentiated rates of excise duty – Principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations.#Case C-184/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34976Arrêt de la Cour (huitième chambre) du 30 avril 2020.#HB et IC contre Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS).#Renvoi préjudiciel – Libre circulation des personnes – Article 21 TFUE – Principe de non-discrimination en raison de la nationalité – Article 18 TFUE – Convention préventive de la double imposition – Travailleurs du secteur public – Pensionné résidant dans un État membre autre que celui lui versant une pension de retraite et ne possédant pas la nationalité de l’État membre de résidence – Impôt sur le revenu – Prétendue perte d’avantages fiscaux – Prétendue entrave à la liberté de circulation et prétendue discrimination.#Affaires jointes C-168/19 et C-169/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34977Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 April 2020.#HB and IC v Istituto nazionale della previdenza sociale (INPS).#Requests for a preliminary ruling from the Corte dei Conti - Sezione Giurisdizionale Per la Regione Puglia.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of movement for persons — Article 21 TFEU — Principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality — Article 18 TFEU — Convention for the avoidance of double taxation — Public sector workers — Pensioner residing in a Member State other than that paying retirement pension and who does not have the nationality of the Member State of residence — Income tax — Alleged loss of tax advantages — Alleged impediment to freedom of movement and alleged discrimination.#Joined Cases C-168/19 and C-169/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34978Arrêt de la Cour (dixième chambre) du 30 avril 2020.#« Оvergas Mrezhi » AD et « Balgarska gazova asotsiatsia » contre Komisia za energiyno i vodno regulirane.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Règles communes pour le marché intérieur du gaz naturel – Directive 2009/73/CE – Article 3, paragraphes 1 à 3, et article 41, paragraphe 16 – Obligations de service public – Obligations de stockage de gaz naturel en vue de garantir la sécurité de l’approvisionnement et la régularité de la fourniture – Réglementation nationale prévoyant que la charge financière relative aux obligations de service public imposées aux entreprises de gaz naturel est répercutée sur leurs clients – Conditions – Adoption, par une autorité de régulation nationale, d’un acte imposant une obligation de service public – Procédure – Articles 36 et 38 de la charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne.#Affaire C-5/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34979Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 30 April 2020.#„Оvergas Mrezhi“ AD and „Balgarska gazova asotsiatsia“ v Komisia za energiyno i vodno regulirane (KEVR).#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common rules for the internal market in natural gas — Directive 2009/73/EC — Article 3(1) to (3) and Article 41(16) — Public service obligations — Natural gas storage obligations for the purposes of ensuring the security and regularity of supply — National legislation providing that the financial burden of the public service obligations imposed on the natural gas undertakings is to be passed on to their customers — Conditions — Adoption of a legal act by a national regulatory authority imposing a public service obligation — Procedure — Articles 36 and 38 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.#Case C-5/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.
34980Opinion of Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona delivered on 30 April 2020.#DenizBank AG v Verein für Konsumenteninformation.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Directive (EU) 2015/2366 – Payment services in the internal market – Article 4(14) – Concept of ‘payment instrument’ – Personalised multifunctional bank cards – Near-field communication (NFC) functionality – Article 52(6)(a) and Article 54(1) – Information to be provided to users – Change in the conditions of a framework contract – Tacit consent – Article 63(1)(a) and (b) – Rights and obligations related to payment services – Derogation for low-value payment instruments – Conditions under which applicable – Payment instrument that does not allow its blocking – Payment instrument used anonymously – Limitation of the temporal effects of the judgment.#Case C-287/19.cjeu_case · 30 апреля 2020 г.